The uphill putt left short

[betarhoalphadelta]

On 7/17/2023 at 9:24 AM, MelloYello said:

 

Well, one guy's description of "trying to make it" is another guy's description of "lagging" it. They might even be the same thing depending on who you talk to. I've heard some good putters decry lagging because they hear that and think of it as a sloppy, careless attempt. To others, lagging it might describe (as you do) the elimination of some unhelpful tendency to try and make it, force it, ram it, etc. 

 

I think you should pick whatever verbiage describes what's proven to work best. 

 

I've stopped listening to players particular verbiage. There's no clear definition for any of this stuff. 

 

Yeah, the only thing I can think of when someone says they're "trying to make it" is that they're trying to make sure they don't leave it short. Because even on a long putt you're trying to pick a line and speed that will hole it if you get it right. 

 

The difference IMHO is that the shorter the putt, the more you want to make sure you can't miss short. The longer the putt, the more you want to putt it with a "die at the hole" speed. On a 4-footer, leaving it on line an inch short is a travesty. On a 40-footer, that's a hell of a putt. I know we all HATE the 40-footer where it dies an inch short, on line. But it's still a hell of a putt. 

 

So on a 4-footer, you want to target a speed and line where the ball will roll 18-24" past the cup. Because it's VERY unlikely that you'll ever leave that short, but it's also unlikely with that speed that you'll be looking at a 4-footer coming back if you miss long. 

 

On a 40-footer, you want to target a line and speed where the ball will die at the cup. Because with variance in line, stroke quality, speed of the green, uphill/downhill upgrain/downgrain things you may not have judged correctly, you might very well have a speed variance where you could end up 4 feet short or 4 feet long. If you target a speed that "never misses short" and you have a 10% distance variance, you might be suddenly looking at an 7-8 footer coming back if you overshoot. 

[North Butte]

Unless it is just an almost unstoppably fast downhill putt, I am usually visualizing a pretty similar speed to what I would on a level or uphill one. The greens at my home course are generally very nice but they still at times get a little worn down right at the hole. I just hate it when a "die it in" putt wanders an inch off to one side or the other as it reaches the hole because there's a bump of some kind right by the lip. 

[PracticeSwinger]

10 hours ago, betarhoalphadelta said:

 

Yeah, the only thing I can think of when someone says they're "trying to make it" is that they're trying to make sure they don't leave it short. Because even on a long putt you're trying to pick a line and speed that will hole it if you get it right. 

 

The difference IMHO is that the shorter the putt, the more you want to make sure you can't miss short. The longer the putt, the more you want to putt it with a "die at the hole" speed. On a 4-footer, leaving it on line an inch short is a travesty. On a 40-footer, that's a hell of a putt. I know we all HATE the 40-footer where it dies an inch short, on line. But it's still a hell of a putt. 

 

So on a 4-footer, you want to target a speed and line where the ball will roll 18-24" past the cup. Because it's VERY unlikely that you'll ever leave that short, but it's also unlikely with that speed that you'll be looking at a 4-footer coming back if you miss long. 

 

On a 40-footer, you want to target a line and speed where the ball will die at the cup. Because with variance in line, stroke quality, speed of the green, uphill/downhill upgrain/downgrain things you may not have judged correctly, you might very well have a speed variance where you could end up 4 feet short or 4 feet long. If you target a speed that "never misses short" and you have a 10% distance variance, you might be suddenly looking at an 7-8 footer coming back if you overshoot. 

Tour dispersion